CN109146088B

CN109146088B - System and method for evaluating used components

Info

Publication number: CN109146088B
Application number: CN201810667037.8A
Authority: CN
Inventors: 克雷格·马丁·法尔尼奥克; 威廉姆·塔里恩·爱德华兹; 丹尼尔·雷·特拉普
Original assignee: Boeing Co
Current assignee: Boeing Co
Priority date: 2017-06-27
Filing date: 2018-06-25
Publication date: 2023-09-26
Anticipated expiration: 2038-06-25
Also published as: JP2019035732A; CN109146088A; EP3421929B1; JP7144187B2; SG10201805290YA; US20180372486A1; US10591288B2; EP3421929A1

Abstract

A system and method for evaluating a used component includes receiving three-dimensional (3D) measurement data (162) based on measurements of a first used component (110) of a particular component type. The method further includes performing a comparison of the 3D measurement data (162) and an in-service tolerance (172) associated with the particular component type, the in-service tolerance (172) determined based on at least a measurement of the second used component (110) of the particular component type and an evaluation of structural characteristics of the second used component (110). The method further includes generating an output (182) indicating whether the first used component (110) is suitable for reuse based on the comparison.

Description

System and method for evaluating used components

Technical Field

The present disclosure relates generally to evaluating used components.

Background

During structural inspection and maintenance of an aircraft, aircraft components are inspected, measured, and compared to predetermined (e.g., initial or as-designed) allowable limits (such as design tolerances). For example, the components are manually measured by a service technician using a measuring tool (e.g., caliper, micrometer, scale, hull gauge, etc.). The measurement is compared to a design tolerance of the component (e.g., a design tolerance indicated by a 3D model or a 2D blueprint). If the measurement is not within the design tolerance, the measurement is sent to a structural engineer (who may not be on site) for analysis. The analysis may indicate that the component is to be reused, repaired, or discarded.

In addition, due to the complexity of the analysis, the structural engineer may need more measurements to complete the analysis, which may extend inspection and maintenance cycle times. This structural inspection and maintenance process is very time consuming and makes it almost impossible to use complex analyses of components or similar components of the same type.

Disclosure of Invention

In one particular implementation, a method includes receiving three-dimensional (3D) measurement data based on measurements of a first used component of a particular component type. The method further includes performing a comparison of the 3D measurement data and an in-service tolerance (in-service tolerance) associated with the particular component type, the in-service tolerance determined based on at least a measurement of a second used component of the particular component type and an evaluation of a structural characteristic of the second used component. The method further includes generating an output indicating whether the first used component is suitable for reuse based on the comparison.

In another particular implementation, a system includes a measurement device and a computing device. The measurement device is configured to generate 3D measurement data based on measurement results of the first used component of the specific component type. The computing device is configured to perform a comparison of the 3D measurement data and an in-service tolerance associated with the particular component type, the in-service tolerance determined based on at least a measurement of a second used component of the particular component type and an evaluation of a structural characteristic of the second used component. The computing device is further configured to generate an output indicating whether the first used component is suitable for reuse based on the comparison.

In another particular implementation, a non-transitory processor-readable medium stores processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to receive 3D measurement data based on scanning a first used component of a particular component type. The instructions also cause the processor to perform a comparison of the 3D measurement data and an in-service tolerance associated with the particular component type, the in-service tolerance determined based on at least a measurement of a second used component of the particular component type and an evaluation of a structural characteristic of the second used component. The instructions further cause the processor to generate an output indicating whether the first used component is suitable for reuse based on the comparison.

Drawings

FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating an example of a system for evaluating components for reuse;

FIG. 2 is a flow chart of an example of a method for evaluating a component for reuse;

FIG. 3 is a flow chart of an example of a method for performing an evaluation of a structural characteristic of a component;

FIG. 4 is a flow chart of another example of a method for performing an evaluation of a used component;

FIG. 5 is a flow chart of an example of comparing the size of a used component to in-service tolerances;

FIG. 6 is a flow chart of another example of comparing the size of a used component to an in-service tolerance; and

FIG. 7 is an illustration of a block diagram of a computing environment including a general purpose computing device configured to evaluate components for reuse in accordance with the present disclosure.

Detailed Description

Implementations described herein are directed to a system and method for inspection and maintenance of components of a platform. The platform comprises or corresponds to an aircraft, spacecraft, ship, building, bridge, oil rig, power plant, chemical plant, etc. A measurement device (e.g., a three-dimensional (3D) laser scanner) scans a particular component of the platform to generate 3D measurement data (e.g., a point cloud). By determining 3D measurement data using a measurement device (e.g., an automatic measurement device), accuracy of measurement results of a particular component is increased (e.g., human error is reduced) and more measurement data can be generated within a particular period of time than if the measurement was performed manually. In addition, determining 3D measurement data using a measurement device may reduce the occurrence of events that re-measure a particular component due to incomplete data. Thus, the accuracy of the model and simulation of the component generated based on the 3D measurement data is increased, and inspection and maintenance cycle times may be reduced.

In addition, the 3D measurement data may include metadata such as location information (e.g., where the measurement was made), component identification information, platform identification information, timestamp information, and the like. The metadata may enable storage, retrieval and reuse of 3D measurement data. For example, the metadata may enable the 3D measurement data to be used to reduce the occurrence of events that measure components at future maintenance and inspection intervals, or to predict in-service tolerances for new components that have no maintenance history.

In one particular implementation, a computer receives 3D measurement data for a particular component and performs a comparison of the 3D measurement data (or a 3D model generated based on the 3D measurement data) with an in-service tolerance. In-service tolerances are generated after initial, as-designed tolerances and based on measurements and evaluations of one or more components that are similar to (e.g., the same component type as) the particular component. Thus, in-service tolerances represent deviations from the original, as-designed tolerances. For example, in-service tolerances are generated based at least on structural analysis of a second particular component of a similar platform (e.g., the same platform type). To illustrate, a second 3D model of a second particular component is generated using second 3D measurement data of the second particular component. Static strength and fatigue simulation is performed on a second 3D model of a second particular component, and the results are compared to operational characteristics of the part (e.g., load and fatigue). In addition, in-service tolerances for a particular component (e.g., component type) are updated based on structural analysis of other similar components of that component type.

The computer generates an output indicative of the disposition of the particular component based on the comparison. For example, a computer generates an output indicating that a particular component is suitable for reuse in a platform, that a particular component is to be evaluated, that a particular component is to be repaired, or that a particular component is to be scrapped.

If the particular component is suitable for reuse, the particular component is mounted (e.g., re-mounted) on a platform or the like. Simulation of a 3D model of a component (or testing of a particular component) is not performed because the particular component meets in-service tolerances generated based on the simulation or testing of other components of the same type. By using in-service tolerances, the amount of evaluation of the component (e.g., simulation analysis of a 3D model or testing of the physical component) may be reduced, and inspection and maintenance cycle times may be reduced.

If the output indicates that the particular component is to be evaluated, a 3D model of the particular component is generated and static strength and fatigue simulation is performed on the 3D model of the particular component. The results of the evaluation are compared to the operating characteristics (e.g., load and fatigue) of the particular component, and the in-service tolerance may be updated based on the results (e.g., if the particular component meets or exceeds performance requirements).

If the output indicates that the particular component is to be repaired, the particular component may be scanned (e.g., rescanned) after the repair is performed to determine whether the repaired component meets the in-service tolerance. The in-service tolerances may be stored on a server or in a database and may be accessed by maintenance personnel at multiple locations to enable the multiple locations to take advantage of the latest in-service tolerances.

Fig. 1 shows an example of a diagram 100 of a system 101 for evaluating used components for reuse in a platform. The system 101 may enable evaluation of used components, generation of in-service tolerances, and updating of in-service tolerances. The system 101 includes a measurement system 102, a structural analysis device 104, and a database 106. FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a system 101 that evaluates a component 110 of a platform 108. Although one measurement system and one structural analysis device are shown in fig. 1, in other implementations, system 101 includes multiple measurement systems and multiple structural analysis devices.

Component 110 is a used component that includes deviations from the original as-designed or manufactured component (e.g., an unused component). To illustrate, the component 110 has wear, damage, or both, resulting in differences from the component by design and the tolerance by design 192. Platform 108 includes or corresponds to a complex system having multiple components, including component 110, and has a relatively long useful life. One or more of the components of the platform 108 may have a service life that is less than the service life of the platform 108, or may cause damage or wear during operation of the platform 108. Accordingly, one or more of the plurality of components are evaluated and replaced during the life of the platform 108. As an illustrative example, the platform 108 may include or correspond to an aircraft, spacecraft, ship, building, bridge, oil rig, power plant, or chemical plant.

Measurement system 102 includes a measurement device 112 and a computing device 114 configured to be coupled via an interface 116. Measurement device 112 (e.g., a 3D measurement device) includes a processor 122, memory 124, and a sensor 126. The memory 124 is configured to store 3D measurement data 162 generated by the measurement device 112. The measurement device 112 is configured to measure the component 110 using the sensor 126 and generate 3D measurement data 162. The measurement device 112 includes or corresponds to a 3D laser scanning device, a contact measurement device, an optical measurement device, a coordinate measuring machine, an electronic aperture gauge, or a combination thereof. The measurement device 112 may be fixed, portable, or handheld, and may include wired communication capabilities, wireless communication capabilities, or both. In some implementations, the measurement device 112 is configured to measure the component 110 while the component 110 is mounted on the platform 108. In other implementations, the measurement device 112 is configured to measure the component 110 after the component 110 has been partially or fully unloaded from the platform 108. In one particular implementation, the 3D measurement data 162 generated by the measurement device 112 includes or corresponds to a point cloud. In other implementations, the 3D measurement data 162 may include or correspond to probe measurements or scan data.

In some implementations, the 3D measurement data 162 includes metadata, such as location information (e.g., where the measurements were made), component identification information, platform identification information, timestamp information, and the like. The metadata may enable storage, retrieval, and reuse of the 3D measurement data 162. For example, based on at least the component identification information, the 3D measurement data 162 may be reused for future evaluation of the component 110. As another example, based on at least the component identification information, the 3D measurement data 162 may be compared to updated 3D measurement data generated based on measuring (e.g., re-measuring) the component 110. Additionally, based on at least the component identification information and the platform identification information, the 3D measurement data 162 may also be used to generate in-service tolerances for new component types similar to the component 110.

The computing device 114 is configured to receive 3D measurement data 162 via the interface 116. The interface 116 is configured to transfer data between the measurement device 112 and the computing device 114. The interface 116 may include or correspond to a wireless interface or a wired interface of the computing device 114. In one particular implementation, the interface 116 is an input/output (I/O) interface, such as a Universal Serial Bus (USB) interface.

Computing device 114 includes a processor 132, a memory 134, and a display 136. The memory 134 is configured to store 3D measurement data 162, in-service tolerances 172, and component handling output 182.

In-service tolerance 172 includes in-service tolerances for various types of components and platforms. For example, a particular set of in-service tolerances 172 corresponds to a particular type of component of one or more platforms. In-service tolerance 172 includes dimensional tolerances of component 110, such as length tolerance, width tolerance, height tolerance, area tolerance, volume tolerance, or a combination thereof. In some implementations, in-service tolerances 172 include tolerances for an overall dimension (e.g., an internal dimension) of component 110, tolerances for a dimension (e.g., an internal dimension) of a sub-component of component 110, or a combination thereof. In-service tolerance 172 may include a value (e.g., a positive or negative threshold) or a range of values (e.g., 0.997 to 1.003, commonly referred to as 1 inch + or-0.003 inch), or a combination thereof.

Additionally or alternatively, in-service tolerances 172 include tolerances for wear (abrasion, warping, delamination, etc.) of component 110 and tolerances for damage (puncture, tearing, etc.) of component 110. As an illustrative example, in-service tolerance 172 includes a degree of warp tolerance. As another example, in-service tolerances 172 include depth tolerances of the puncture and corresponding cross-sectional area tolerances of the puncture. Different depth penetration tolerances may have different corresponding cross-sectional area tolerances. In some implementations, in-service tolerance 172 includes a "positive" or "acceptable" tolerance. To illustrate, positive tolerance indicates the size of the component 110 that can be repaired, reused, or both. For example, a positive tolerance indicates when a structural characteristic of the component 110 meets an operational threshold. Additionally or alternatively, in-service tolerance 172 includes a "negative" or "replacement" tolerance. To illustrate, the negative tolerance indicates the size of the component 110 that cannot be repaired, reused, or both. For example, a negative tolerance indicates when the structural characteristics of the component 110 will not meet the operational threshold.

In-service tolerance 172 is generated after a per-design (e.g., initial or manufactured) tolerance 192 is determined during design and manufacture of the component. In-service tolerance 172 is generated based on analysis and testing of component 110 and operational thresholds (e.g., load thresholds, fatigue thresholds, etc.). For example, the in-service tolerance 172 is determined based on at least a measurement of a second used component of the particular component type and an evaluation of structural characteristics of the second used component. The evaluation includes a simulation analysis, a non-destructive test, a destructive test, or a combination thereof.

The computing device 114 is also configured to perform a comparison of the 3D measurement data 162 and an in-service tolerance 172 associated with a particular component type of the component 110. For example, the processor 132 determines the size of the component 110 based on the 3D measurement data 162 and compares the size of the component 110 to the in-service tolerance 172. Alternatively, the computing device 114 is configured to perform a comparison of the 3D model data 164 (generated based on the 3D measurement data 162) with the in-service tolerance 172.

The computing device 114 is further configured to generate a component handling output 182 based on the comparison. The component handling output 182 indicates whether the component 110 is to be one or more of reused, evaluated, repaired, or replaced (e.g., discarded). To illustrate, the processor 132 generates a component handling output 182, the component handling output 182 indicating that a used component is to be reused when the size of the component 110 meets the in-service tolerance 172. As another illustration, the processor 132 generates a component handling output 182, the component handling output 182 indicating that a used component is to be evaluated when one or more of the dimensions of the component 110 fail to meet the in-service tolerance 172.

The display 136 is configured to output a component handling output 182. When the component handling output 182 indicates that the component 110 is to be reused, the component 110 may be installed in the platform 108 or another platform (e.g., another platform of the same platform type). In one particular implementation, the component handling output 182 indicates suggested repair parameters (e.g., type of repair, amount of repair, etc.).

In fig. 1, measurement system 102 also includes a network interface 118 configured to communicate with structural analysis device 104 and database 106. To illustrate, the measurement system 102 is configured to transmit the 3D measurement data 162, the 3D model data 164, or both to a remote device (e.g., the structural analysis device 104). In some implementations, when the component handling output 182 indicates that at least one measurement of the component 110 does not meet the in-service tolerance 172 or indicates that the component 110 is to be evaluated, the measurement system 102 transmits the 3D measurement data 162, the 3D model data 164, or both to the structural analysis device 104. Measurement system 102 is configured to receive in-service tolerance 172, an in-service tolerance update, or both from database 106. Additionally or alternatively, the measurement system 102 is configured to receive tolerance updates from the structural analysis device 104. The network interface 118 may include or correspond to a wireless network interface, a wired network interface, or both. In one particular implementation, the network interface 118 is included in the computing device 114.

The structural analysis device 104 is configured to perform an evaluation of structural properties of the 3D model of the used component to generate data indicative of at least one structural property of the used component. In some implementations, the structural analysis device 104 is configured to compare the at least one structural characteristic to at least one structural characteristic threshold of the component 110. The structural analysis device 104 is configured to generate a second component handling output. The second component disposal output may indicate whether the component 110 is to be reused, repaired, or discarded.

The structural analysis device 104 includes a processor 142, a memory 144, and a network interface 148. The memory 144 is configured to store the simulation application 146, the 3D measurement data 162, and the 3D model data 164. The processor 142 is configured to execute an analog application 146. In some implementations, the simulation application 146 is configured to be based on 3D measurement data162 generate 3D model data 164. In other implementations, the structural analysis device 104 receives the 3D model data 164 from the computing device 114. In one particular implementation, the simulation application 146 includes a Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) application, a Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM) application, or a Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) application, such as a registered trademark of a dawsonite system Or Siemens>(previously referred to as Unigraphics).

The simulation application 146 is configured to perform a simulated structural analysis (e.g., finite element analysis, static analysis, etc.) on the 3D model data 164 to generate data indicative of at least one structural characteristic of the component 110. For example, the simulation application 146 may perform both finite element analysis and static analysis to generate load ratings and fatigue ratings. The simulation application 146 is configured to compare the at least one structural characteristic to at least one structural characteristic threshold of the component 110. For example, the load rating is compared to a load threshold (e.g., 1.5 times the operating load experienced by the component 110 when the platform 108 is in operation). Additionally or alternatively, the fatigue rating is compared to a fatigue threshold (e.g., a number of cycles until the next inspection or retraction of the component). The load rating and fatigue rating may be stored on the memory 144. Additionally or alternatively, the load rating and fatigue rating may be retrieved or received from the database 106. In other implementations, the user compares the at least one structural characteristic to at least one structural characteristic threshold of the component 110.

In some implementations, the simulation application 146 is configured to generate the second component handling output based on the comparison (e.g., the second comparison). In such implementations, the structural analysis device 104 sends the second component handling output to the measurement system 102 via the network interface 148. The second component handling output may indicate that component 110 meets or exceeds the operational and safety thresholds and is approved for reuse (e.g., continue servicing). In other implementations, the simulation application 146 is configured to generate output data for determining or generating the second component treatment output. In such implementations, a second component handling output may be generated based on the user input. Additionally or alternatively, a second component treatment output is generated by the measurement system 102 based on the output data.

In some implementations, the structural analysis device 104 is further configured to generate a tolerance update 174 based on the size of the component 110, the in-service tolerance 172, or both, as further described with reference to fig. 4. In-service tolerance 172 represents a minimum or maximum size of a previously evaluated component that meets or exceeds the operational and safety thresholds. Tolerance update 174 represents the updated minimum or maximum size that meets or exceeds the operational and safety thresholds based on the evaluation of component 110. Additionally or alternatively, in-service tolerance 172 represents a minimum or maximum size of previously evaluated components that do not reach the operational and safety thresholds.

A tolerance update 174 may be generated in response to performing the second comparison. For example, the structural analysis device 104 generates a tolerance update 174 based on the determined structural characteristics that meet the threshold (e.g., meet or exceed the operational threshold and the safety threshold). Additionally or alternatively, a tolerance update 174 is generated in response to generation of the second component handling output. For example, the structural analysis device 104 generates a tolerance update 174 indicating that the component 110 is to be repaired or reused. The tolerance update 174 indicates a new in-service tolerance for the component 110 or indicates a modification to an existing in-service tolerance or to a per-design tolerance in the per-design tolerance 192. For example, a particular tolerance update may indicate a new in-volume service tolerance (e.g., 221 inch cube), a modification to an existing in-height service tolerance (e.g., 4.8 inch to 4.6 inch), or both.

In such implementations in which the structural analysis device 104 generates the tolerance update 174, the structural analysis device 104 sends the tolerance update 174 to the database 106 via the network interface 148. In one particular implementation, the structural analysis device 104 sends the tolerance update 174 to the database 106 based on a structural analysis or second component handling output indicating that the component 110 meets or exceeds the operational and safety thresholds and is approved for reuse (e.g., continue servicing). Additionally, the structural analysis device 104 may send the tolerance update 174 to the measurement system 102 via the network interface 148. In other implementations, the measurement system 102 generates the tolerance update 174 in response to receiving the second component treatment output, the output data, the user input, or a combination thereof.

Database 106 includes a processor 152, a memory 154, and a network interface 158. Database 106 is configured to store and update in-service tolerances 172. For example, the processor 152 is configured to generate or modify an in-service tolerance 172 based on the tolerance update 174. Database 106 is configured to be accessible by measurement system 102 (e.g., computing device 114) and structural analysis device 104. In some implementations, database 106 is configured to store 3D measurement data (such as 3D measurement data 162). Database 106 may store 3D measurement data, categorize 3D measurement data, retrieve 3D measurement data, or a combination thereof based on corresponding metadata. In such implementations, database 106 may also store treatment information related to 3D measurement data 162, such as treatments indicated by corresponding component treatment outputs. In one particular implementation, the treatment information is stored in metadata of the corresponding 3D measurement data. In some implementations, database 106 is configured to store 3D measurement data for components indicated as being suitable for reuse by the corresponding component handling output. In such implementations, database 106 may not store 3D measurement data for components that are not indicated as suitable for reuse.

The network interface 158 is configured to communicate with the measurement system 102 (e.g., the computing device 114) and the structural analysis device 104. For example, database 106 receives tolerance updates from measurement system 102 (e.g., computing device 114), structural analysis device 104, or both. In addition, the database 106 may send or push (e.g., send in response to receiving the tolerance update) the tolerance update to the measurement system 102 (e.g., the computing device 114), the structural analysis device 104, or both.

During operation, measurement device 112 measures (or scans) component 110 using sensor 126 and generates 3D measurement data 162. The computing device 114 receives 3D measurement data 162 via the interface 116. The computing device 114 compares the 3D measurement data 162 with in-service tolerances 172 based on the type of component 110 (e.g., component type, platform type, or both). Alternatively, the computing device 114 generates 3D model data 164 based on the 3D measurement data 162 and compares the 3D model data to in-service tolerances 172 based on the type of component 110 (e.g., component type, platform type, or both). To illustrate, the processor 132 determines the dimensions of the component 110 from the 3D measurement data 162 or the 3D model data 164. The processor 132 compares the size of the component 110 to in-service tolerances 172 (e.g., a set of in-service tolerances in the in-service tolerances 172 corresponding to the type of the component 110). The computing device 114 generates a component handling output 182 based on the comparison and displays the component handling output 182 via the display 136. To illustrate, when the size of the component 110 meets (e.g., is within) the in-service tolerance 172, the component handling output 182 indicates that the component 110 is to be reused (e.g., reinstalled in the platform 108, installed in another similar platform, or not repaired or replaced).

When one or more dimensions of the component 110 exceeds (e.g., does not meet) the in-service tolerance 172, the component handling output 182 indicates that the component 110 is to be evaluated, repaired, or replaced (e.g., or discarded). For example, when the length dimension of the component 110 does not meet (e.g., is not within a range of acceptable length values) the in-service tolerance 172 or when there is no corresponding in-service tolerance, the component handling output 182 indicates that the component 110 is to be evaluated. As another example, when the length dimension of the component 110 does not satisfy (e.g., is not within) a first length tolerance of the in-service tolerance 172 and satisfies (e.g., is within a range of repairable length values) a second length tolerance of the in-service tolerance 172, the component handling output 182 indicates that the component 110 is to be repaired. As yet another example, as described with reference to fig. 4-6, when the length dimension of the component 110 does not meet the first length tolerance or the second length tolerance, the component handling output 182 indicates that the component 110 is to be replaced.

To evaluate the component 110, the computing device 114 sends the 3D measurement data 162 or the 3D model data 164 to the structural analysis device 104 via the network interface 118. In an implementation in which the 3D measurement data 162 is received by the structural analysis device 104, the structural analysis device 104 generates 3D model data 164 based on the 3D measurement data 162. To illustrate, the processor 142 executes the simulation application 146 to generate 3D model data 164. The structural analysis device 104 performs a simulated structural analysis on the 3D model data 164 using the simulation application 146 to determine one or more structural characteristics of the component 110. For example, the processor 142 executes the simulation application 146 to perform finite element analysis, static analysis, or a combination thereof to determine a load rating (e.g., a shear rating, a strain rating, or both), a fatigue rating (e.g., multiple cycles), or a combination thereof, of the component 110. Alternatively, the component 110 is evaluated using a non-destructive test.

The structural analysis device 104 generates a second component handling output based on comparing the determined structural characteristics of the component 110 to the operational threshold. To illustrate, the structural analysis device 104 performs a comparison of the load rating and fatigue rating with the load threshold and fatigue threshold. The structural analysis device 104 sends the second component handling output to the measurement system 102 via the network interface 148. The computing device 114 displays the second component handling output. The second component handling output may indicate that the component 110 is to be reused, repaired, or replaced. For example, when the load rating meets (e.g., exceeds) the load threshold and the fatigue rating meets (e.g., exceeds) the fatigue threshold, the second component handling output indicates that the component 110 is to be reused. As another example, the second component handling output indicating component 110 will be repaired or replaced when the load rating fails to meet (e.g., fails to exceed) the load rating or the fatigue rating fails to meet (e.g., fails to exceed) the fatigue threshold.

In some implementations, the structural analysis device 104 generates the tolerance update 174 based on the dimensions of the component 110. For example, when the load rating meets (e.g., exceeds) the load threshold and the fatigue rating meets (e.g., exceeds) the fatigue threshold, the structural analysis device 104 generates the tolerance update 174 based on the dimensions of the component 110. As another example, when the load rating fails to meet (e.g., fails to exceed) the load rating or the fatigue rating fails to meet (e.g., fails to exceed) the fatigue threshold, the structural analysis device 104 generates a tolerance update 174 (e.g., a tolerance update for negative tolerances) based on the dimensions of the component 110. The structural analysis device 104 sends the tolerance update 174 to the database 106 via the network interface 148. Database 106 modifies (e.g., updates) in-service tolerances 172 based on tolerance updates 174. Additionally, the structural analysis device 104 may send the tolerance update 174 to the measurement system 102 via the network interface 148. Thus, the dimensions of the component 110 are stored as in-service tolerances 172 for comparison with future evaluated components.

When the component 110 is to be reused, the component 110 is reinstalled in the platform 108 or in another similar platform. When the component 110 is to be repaired (e.g., refurbished), the component 110 may be repaired by hand or by automated machinery. In some implementations, the second component handling output indicates a parameter of the repair. For example, the second component handling output indicates a type of repair, a size of repair, or a combination thereof. To illustrate, the second component handling output indicates that a 1 inch fill repair is performed on the component 110. After repairing the component 110, the component 110 may be measured (re-measured) by the measurement system 102, and a third comparison may be performed to verify that the dimensions of the repaired component are within the in-service tolerance 172. If the dimensions of the repaired component are not within the in-service tolerance 172, the repaired component may be discarded or re-evaluated (e.g., by the structural analysis device 104). In one particular implementation, the measurement system 102 is located at an airport or maintenance facility and the structural analysis device 104 is located at an engineering facility. In other implementations, the measurement system 102 and the structural analysis device 104 are integrated into one system.

By determining the 3D measurement data 162 using the measurement device 112, the accuracy of the measurement of the component 110 is increased (e.g., the likelihood of human error is reduced) and more measurement data may be generated over a particular period of time as compared to manual measurement. In addition, determining 3D measurement data 162 using measurement device 112 may reduce the occurrence of events that re-measure component 110 due to incomplete data. Further, by determining the 3D measurement data 162, a 3D model may be generated that is capable of comparing the dimensions of the component 110 to the in-service tolerance 172. Thus, the accuracy of the model and simulation of the component generated based on the 3D measurement data is increased, and inspection and maintenance cycle times may be reduced.

By using in-service tolerances, the amount of evaluation of the component (e.g., simulation analysis of a 3D model or testing of the physical component) may be reduced, and maintenance cycle time may be reduced. For example, when a particular used component meets previously established in-service tolerances (based on evaluation of similar components), the particular component may be reused without evaluation, thereby reducing maintenance cycle time. As more components are evaluated by the system 101, the likelihood that a particular component will be evaluated decreases (e.g., a new component is more likely to meet existing in-service tolerances established based on previous evaluations).

Additionally, if the components 110 on the platform 108 have been previously evaluated by the system 101, the analysis may be completed before submitting (e.g., introducing) the platform 108 for inspection. For example, if the component 110 has been previously repaired, it may be possible to determine that the previous repair combined with visual evidence of new wear or damage makes the component unsuitable for further repair prior to introduction. In this case, replacement parts (which may have long purchase or stock time) may be ordered before submitting the platform 108 for inspection, allowing the platform 108 to remain in service and reducing downtime of the platform 108. In addition, in-service tolerances for the new component and the new platform may be generated based on 3D measurements, evaluations, in-service tolerances for other similar components and similar platforms, or a combination thereof.

Fig. 2 illustrates a method 200 of evaluating a used component for reuse (e.g., to continue servicing). Method 200 may be performed by system 101, measurement system 102, computing device 114, or processor 132 of fig. 1. The method 200 includes, at 202, receiving three-dimensional (3D) measurement data based on measurements of a first used component of a particular component type. For example, measurement device 112 measures component 110 and generates 3D measurement data 162. As explained with reference to fig. 1, computing device 114 receives 3D measurement data 162 from measurement device 112 or memory (such as memory 124 or memory 134). The measurement device 112 may include or correspond to a laser measurement device, an optical measurement device, a coordinate measurement machine, or a contact-based measurement device.

The method 200 of fig. 2 includes, at 204, performing a comparison of the 3D measurement data and an in-service tolerance associated with the particular component type, the in-service tolerance determined based on at least a measurement of a second used component of the particular component type and an evaluation of structural characteristics of the second used component. For example, as explained with reference to fig. 1, the measurement device 112 performs a comparison of the 3D measurement data 162 or the 3D model data 164 (generated based on the 3D measurement data 162) with the in-service tolerance 172. The second used component includes or corresponds to the previously evaluated used component. As described with reference to fig. 1 and 3, the second used component may be evaluated by the structural analysis device 104 of fig. 1 and before performing the comparison. In some implementations, the results of the simulated structural analysis of the 3D model including the second used component, the results of the non-destructive testing of the second used component, the results of the destructive testing of the second used component, or a combination thereof are evaluated. In some implementations, the structural characteristics include a load rating and a fatigue rating (e.g., multiple cycles or fatigue load limits).

In some implementations, the evaluation of the second component is performed based on determining that the second 3D measurement data exceeds a particular one of the per-design tolerances. One or more of the in-service tolerances 172 are determined based on a simulation of the 3D model of the second component that satisfies the load threshold and the fatigue threshold.

The in-service tolerance may include or correspond to a subset of the in-service tolerances in the in-service tolerances 172. A subset of in-service tolerances may be associated with a particular component type, a similar platform, or both. In-service tolerance 172 is different from the as-designed or initial tolerance, and in-service tolerance 172 has been generated (and updated) based on previous evaluations of similar types of components and similar platforms. Evaluation of components of similar component types and similar platforms may be performed by a number of different devices (e.g., structural analysis device 104 of fig. 1 and other structural analysis devices of system 101).

The method 200 of fig. 2 includes, at 206, generating an output indicating whether the first used component is suitable for reuse based on the comparison. For example, as described with reference to fig. 1, the computing device 114 generates the component handling output 182 based on the comparison. The component handling output 182 indicates whether the first used component meets the in-service tolerance 172 previously determined for that type of component. As described with reference to fig. 1, the component handling output 182 may indicate that the component 110 is to be reused, evaluated, repaired, or replaced (e.g., discarded).

In some implementations, the first used component is mounted on the platform when the output indicates that the first used component is suitable for reuse. In one particular implementation, the platform is an aircraft. In other implementations, the platform is a spacecraft, ship, building, bridge, oil rig, power plant, or chemical plant.

In some implementations, the method 200 further includes transmitting the 3D measurement data to a structural analysis device to perform a second evaluation of structural characteristics of the first used component based on the 3D measurement data when the output indicates that the first used component is not suitable for reuse. For example, as described with reference to fig. 1, the computing device 114 sends the 3D measurement data 162 or the 3D model data 164 to the structural analysis device 104.

In other implementations, the method 200 further includes performing a second evaluation of the structural characteristics of the first used component when the output indicates that the first used component is not suitable for reuse. For example, as described with reference to fig. 1, the computing device 114 performs a second evaluation on the 3D measurement data 162 or the 3D model data 164.

In some implementations, performing the second evaluation includes performing a finite element analysis to determine a load rating and a fatigue rating. Performing the second evaluation further includes performing a second comparison of the load rating and the fatigue rating with the load threshold and the fatigue threshold. Performing the second evaluation further comprises outputting a result of the second comparison.

In some implementations, the method 200 further includes generating a second output indicating that the first used component is suitable for reuse based on the second evaluation of the structural characteristics of the first used component.

In some implementations, the method 200 further includes sending the update data to a database. Updating the data causes the database to update the in-service tolerance based on the second assessment, the 3D measurement data, or both. For example, the computing device 114 or the structural analysis device 104 generates the tolerance update 174, and either the computing device 114 or the structural analysis device 104 sends the tolerance update 174 to the database 106, as described with reference to fig. 1.

In some implementations, the method 200 further includes displaying a second output indicating that the first used component is to be repaired based on the second assessment of the structural characteristics of the first used component. For example, the display 136 of the computing device 114 outputs or displays the second component treatment output, as described with reference to fig. 1. In some implementations, the output (e.g., the first output or the second output) also indicates that the first used component is to be repaired. In one particular implementation, the output also indicates repair parameters, as described with reference to FIG. 1.

In some implementations, the method 200 further includes generating or updating a rejection threshold in response to the second output indicating that the first used component is not suitable for reuse. For example, the computing device 114 or the structural analysis device 104 may generate or update an in-service tolerance indicating when the component 110 has a size or structural characteristic that is unsuitable for reuse, as described with reference to fig. 1.

In one particular implementation, the memory 134 stores processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor 132 to receive 3D measurement data 162 based on measurements of the component 110 of a particular component type. The instructions also cause the processor 132 to perform a comparison of the 3D measurement data 162 and an in-service tolerance 172 associated with the particular component type. An in-service tolerance 172 is determined based on at least the measurement of the second used component of the particular component type and the evaluation of the structural characteristics of the second used component. The instructions further cause the processor 132 to generate an output indicating whether the first used component is suitable for reuse based on the comparison. In some implementations, the in-service tolerances include multi-dimensional tolerances (e.g., area or capacity tolerances).

FIG. 3 is a flow chart of an example of a method 300 for performing an evaluation of a structural characteristic of a component. Method 300 may be performed by system 101, measurement system 102, computing device 114, processor 132, structural analysis device 104, or processor 142 of fig. 1. The method 300 includes, at 302, performing a simulated structural analysis on a 3D model of the component to determine at least one structural characteristic of the component, the 3D model being generated based on 3D data of the component obtained by the 3D measurement device. For example, as described with reference to fig. 1, the computing device 114 or the structural analysis device 104 performs finite element analysis and static analysis on the 3D model data 164 using the simulation application 146 to generate structural characteristics.

The method 300 includes, at 304, performing a comparison of at least one structural characteristic with at least one structural characteristic threshold of the component. For example, as described with reference to fig. 1, the computing device 114 or the structural analysis device 104 compares the load rating to a load threshold and compares the fatigue rating to a fatigue threshold. In other implementations, the comparison is performed by the user.

The method 300 includes, at 306, generating an output indicating whether the component is suitable for reuse based on the comparison. For example, as described with reference to fig. 1, the computing device 114 or the structural analysis device 104 generates a second component handling output. In some implementations, the second component handling output is generated based on the user input.

FIG. 4 is a flow chart 400 of an example of a method of performing an evaluation of a used component (e.g., component 110). The diagram 400 illustrates operations that may be performed by the computing device 114. The diagram 400 includes, at 402, comparing the size of the component 110 to the in-service tolerance 172. The size may be determined from the 3D measurement data 162 or the 3D model data 164. The diagram 400 includes, at 404, determining whether the size meets the in-service tolerance 172. The diagram 400 includes, at 406, generating an output indicating that the component 110 should be reused, repaired, or replaced in response to determining that the size meets the in-service tolerance 172, as further described with reference to fig. 5 and 6.

The diagram 400 includes, at 408, performing an evaluation to determine structural characteristics of the component 110 in response to determining that the dimensions meet the in-service tolerance 172. The diagram 400 includes, at 410, comparing a structural characteristic of the component 110 to a structural characteristic threshold. The diagram 400 includes, at 412, determining whether a structural characteristic meets a structural characteristic threshold, as described with reference to fig. 1 and 3.

Graph 400 includes, at 414, generating an output indicating that component 110 should be reused in response to determining that the structural characteristic meets the structural characteristic threshold. The diagram 400 includes, at 416, generating one or more tolerance updates based on the size of the component 110, the in-service tolerance 172, or both, in response to determining that the structural characteristic meets the structural characteristic threshold. For example, the dimensions of the component 110 are compared to the in-service tolerance 172 to determine which particular dimensions of the component 110 exceed the in-service tolerance 172. Alternatively, the in-service tolerance that was not met during the comparison of the size to the in-service tolerance 172 is updated. The tolerance update 174 may indicate a change to the in-service tolerance 172 or an alternative value for the in-service tolerance 172. For example, when modifying an in-service tolerance of 1 inch to 3 inches, the tolerance update 174 may include a variation value of "+2 inches" (e.g., an initial tolerance of 1 inch+2 inches = 3 inches) or a replacement value of "3 inches". One or more tolerance updates are sent to database 106 and used to update in-service tolerances 172.

The diagram 400 includes, at 418, generating an output indicating that the component 110 should be repaired or replaced in response to determining that the structural characteristic fails to meet the structural characteristic threshold, as described with reference to fig. 1 and 3. In some implementations, when the component 110 is indicated as to be repaired, a non-destructive test is performed on the component 110 to verify the simulation analysis. Additionally or alternatively, when the component 110 is indicated as to be replaced, destructive testing is performed on the component 110 to verify the simulated analysis.

Fig. 5 is a flow chart 500 of an example of comparing the size of a used component to an in-service tolerance. The diagram 500 illustrates operations that may be performed by the computing device 114. The diagram 500 includes, at 502, comparing the size of the component 110 to the in-service tolerance 172. The size may be determined from the 3D measurement data 162 or the 3D model data 164. The diagram 500 includes, at 504, determining whether the size meets a first one of the in-service tolerances 172. Graph 506 includes, at 506, generating an output indicating that component 110 should be reused in response to determining that the size meets a first one of in-service tolerances 172.

The diagram 500 includes, at 508, determining whether the dimension meets a second one of the in-service tolerances 172 in response to determining that the dimension meets the first one of the in-service tolerances 172. The second tolerance is associated with a value or range of values that indicate that the component 110 is repairable and that the structural characteristic of the repaired component 110 meets the structural characteristic threshold. The diagram 500 includes, at 510, generating an output indicating that the component 110 should be repaired in response to determining that the size meets a second one of the in-service tolerances 172. The diagram 500 includes, at 512, generating an output indicating that the component 110 should be evaluated in response to determining that the size does not meet a second one of the in-service tolerances 172.

Fig. 6 is a flow chart 600 of another example of comparing the size of a used component (e.g., component 110) to in-service tolerance 172. Diagram 600 illustrates operations that may be performed by computing device 114. The diagram 600 includes, at 602, comparing the size of the component 110 to a negative tolerance in the in-service tolerance 172. The size may be determined from the 3D measurement data 162 or the 3D model data 164. Graph 600 includes, at 604, determining whether the dimensions meet a negative tolerance.

The diagram 600 includes, at 606, generating an output indicating that the component 110 should be repaired in response to determining that the dimensions meet a negative tolerance. In such implementations, the negative tolerance is associated with a value of a dimension (determined from a previous evaluation) that cannot be repaired such that the structural characteristic of the repaired component 110 meets the structural characteristic threshold or with a value of a dimension that cannot be repaired due to a specification, such as a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) specification. Additionally or alternatively, the negative tolerance is associated with a value of a dimension that does not satisfy a structural characteristic threshold (e.g., prior to repair of the component 110). In some implementations, the negative threshold corresponds to a range of values.

The diagram 600 includes, at 608, generating an output indicating that the component 110 should be evaluated in response to determining that the dimensions meet a negative tolerance. In other implementations, the output indication component 110 will be replaced (e.g., discarded). Comparing the dimensions to a negative threshold tolerance may further reduce the evaluation and reduce maintenance cycle time. The size may be compared to a negative threshold before or after the size is compared to other tolerances (e.g., positive tolerances or acceptable ranges of values) in the in-service tolerances 172.

Fig. 7 is an illustration of a block diagram of a computing environment 700 including a general purpose computing device 710 configured to support embodiments of computer-implemented methods and computer-executable program instructions (or code) according to the present disclosure. For example, computing device 710 or portions thereof may execute instructions to perform functions of system 101 or functions of a portion of system 101, such as processor 122, processor 132, processor 142, or processor 152. The instructions of control system 101 (or a portion of system 101, such as processor 122, processor 132, processor 142, or processor 152) may include instructions to evaluate the component for reuse (e.g., continue servicing), to perform an evaluation of a structural characteristic of the component, or both. The instructions of the control system 101 (or a part of the system 101) may also include instructions to perform a comparison of the 3D measurement data and in-service tolerances associated with a particular component type. An in-service tolerance is determined based on at least the measurement of the second used component of the particular component type and the evaluation of the structural characteristics of the second used component. The instructions further cause the processor to generate an output indicating whether the first used component is suitable for reuse based on the comparison. In some implementations, the in-service tolerances include multi-dimensional tolerances (e.g., area or capacity tolerances). The computing device 710, or portions thereof, may further execute instructions according to or implementing any of the methods described herein, such as the method 200 of fig. 2 or the method 300 of fig. 3.

Computing device 710 may include a processor 720. The processor 720 may communicate with a system memory 730, one or more storage devices 740, one or more input/output interfaces 750, one or more communication interfaces 760, or a combination thereof. In a particular embodiment, the processor 720 includes or corresponds to the processor 122, the processor 132, the processor 142, or the processor 152. The system memory 730 may include volatile memory devices (e.g., random Access Memory (RAM) devices), nonvolatile memory devices (e.g., read Only Memory (ROM) devices, programmable read only memory, and flash memory), or both. The system memory 730 may include an operating system 732, which operating system 732 may include a basic/input output system for booting the computing device 710, as well as a complete operating system to enable the computing device 710 to interact with users, other programs, and other devices. The system memory 730 may include one or more applications 734 (e.g., the simulation application 146 of fig. 1) executable by the processor 720. For example, the one or more applications 734 may include instructions executable by the processor 720 to control the system 101 to generate 3D model data 164 based on the 3D measurement data 162, to generate dimensions of the component 110 based on the 3D measurement data 162 or the 3D model data 164, and to generate structural characteristics of the component 110 based on the 3D model data 164, or a combination thereof.

Processor 720 may also be in communication with one or more storage devices 740 (such as memory 124, memory 134, memory 144, or memory 154 of fig. 1). For example, the one or more storage devices 740 may include non-volatile storage devices (such as magnetic disks, optical disks, or flash memory devices). Storage 740 may include removable memory devices and non-removable memory devices. Storage 740 may be configured to store an operating system, images of an operating system, applications, and program data. The storage 740 may also store in-service tolerances 172, tolerance updates 174, or both. In a particular embodiment, memory 730, storage 740, or both, include tangible computer-readable media.

The processor 720 may be in communication with one or more input/output interfaces 750, which input/output interfaces 750 enable the computing device 710 to communicate with one or more input/output devices 770 (such as the measurement device 112, the display 136, or both of fig. 1) to facilitate user interaction. Input/output interface 750 may include a serial interface (e.g., a Universal Serial Bus (USB) interface or an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 1394 interface), a parallel interface, a display adapter, an audio adapter, and other interfaces. Input/output devices 770 may include keyboards, pointing devices, displays, speakers, microphones, touch screens, and other devices. Processor 720 may detect interaction events based on user input received via input/output interface 750. In addition, processor 720 may send a display to a display device (e.g., measurement device 112, display 136, or both) via input/output interface 750.

Processor 720 may communicate with measurement device 112, one or more devices 780, or a combination thereof via one or more communication interfaces 760. The one or more communication interfaces 760 may include a wired ethernet interface, an IEEE 802 wireless interface, other wireless communication interfaces, or other network interfaces. The one or more devices 780 may include hosts, servers, workstations, and other computing devices.

Furthermore, the present disclosure includes embodiments according to the following clauses:

clause 1. A method comprising:

receiving three-dimensional (3D) measurement data based on measurement results of a first used component of a particular component type;

performing a comparison of the 3D measurement data and an in-service tolerance associated with the particular component type, the in-service tolerance determined based on at least a measurement of a second used component of the particular component type and an evaluation of a structural characteristic of the second used component; and

an output is generated based on the comparison indicating whether the first used component is suitable for reuse.

Clause 2. The method of clause 1, wherein the evaluation comprises a simulated structural analysis of the 3D model of the second used component, a non-destructive testing of the second used component, or a result of a destructive testing of the second used component.

Clause 3 the method of any of clauses 1-2, wherein the structural characteristics include a load rating and a fatigue rating.

Clause 4. The method of any of clauses 1-3, wherein the first used component is mounted on the platform when the output indicates that the first used component is suitable for reuse.

Clause 5. The method of clause 4, wherein the platform comprises an aircraft.

Clause 6. The method of any of clauses 4-5, wherein the platform comprises a spacecraft, a ship, a building, a bridge, an oil rig, a power plant, or a chemical plant.

Clause 7 the method of any of clauses 1-6, further comprising transmitting the 3D measurement data to a structural analysis device to perform a second assessment of the structural characteristics of the first used component based on the 3D measurement data when the output indicates that the first used component is not suitable for reuse.

Clause 8 the method of any of clauses 1-7, further comprising performing a second evaluation of the structural characteristics of the first used component when the output indicates that the first used component is not suitable for reuse.

Clause 9 the method of clause 8, wherein performing the second evaluation comprises:

Performing a finite element analysis to determine a load rating and a fatigue rating;

performing a second comparison of the load rating and the fatigue rating with the load threshold and the fatigue threshold; and

and outputting a result of the second comparison.

Clause 10. The method of any of clauses 1-9, further comprising generating a second output indicating that the first used component is suitable for reuse based on the second assessment of the structural characteristics of the first used component.

Clause 11 the method of clause 10, further comprising sending update data to the database, wherein the update data causes the database to update the in-service tolerance based on the second assessment, the 3D measurement data, or both.

Clause 12 the method of any of clauses 1-11, further comprising displaying a second output indicating that the first used component is to be repaired based on the second assessment of the structural characteristic of the first used component.

Clause 13 the method of any of clauses 1-12, wherein the output further indicates that the first used component is to be repaired.

Clause 14. The method of any of clauses 1-13, wherein the evaluation of the second component is performed based on determining that the second 3D measurement data exceeds a particular one of the per-design tolerances, and wherein one or more particular one of the in-service tolerances is determined based on a simulation of a 3D model of the second component that meets the load threshold and the fatigue threshold.

Clause 15, a system comprising:

a three-dimensional measurement device configured to generate three-dimensional (3D) measurement data based on measuring a first used component of a particular component type; and

a computing device configured to:

performing a ratio of 3D measurement data and in-service tolerances associated with a particular component type

In-service tolerances are based on measured knots of second used components of at least a particular component type

Evaluation of structural characteristics of the fruit and the second used component; and

16. The system of clause 15, further comprising a network interface configured to:

transmitting the 3D measurement data, a 3D model generated based on the 3D measurement data, or both to a remote device; and

in-service tolerances, in-service tolerance updates, or both are received from a database, wherein the measurement device comprises a laser measurement device, an optical measurement device, or a contact-based measurement device.

Clause 17 the system of any of clauses 15-16, further comprising a database configured to store in-service tolerances.

Clause 18, a non-transitory processor-readable medium storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to:

Clause 19 the non-transitory processor-readable medium of clause 18, wherein the in-service tolerance comprises a length tolerance, a width tolerance, a height tolerance, an area tolerance, a volume tolerance, or a combination thereof.

Clause 20 the non-transitory processor-readable medium of any of clauses 18-19, wherein the first used component has wear resulting in a difference from the designed component.

The illustrations of examples described herein are intended to provide a general understanding of the structure of various implementations. The illustrations are not intended to serve as a complete description of all of the elements and features of apparatus and systems that utilize the structures or methods described herein. Many other implementations may be apparent to those of skill in the art upon reading this disclosure. Other implementations may be utilized and derived from the disclosure, such that structural and logical substitutions and changes may be made without departing from the scope of this disclosure. For example, method operations may be performed in a different order than shown in the figures, or one or more method operations may be omitted. Accordingly, the disclosure and figures are to be regarded as illustrative rather than restrictive.

Moreover, although specific examples have been illustrated and described herein, it should be appreciated that any subsequent arrangement designed to achieve the same or similar results may be substituted for the specific implementations shown. This disclosure is intended to cover any and all subsequent adaptations or variations of various implementations. Combinations of the above implementations, and other implementations not specifically described herein, will be apparent to those of skill in the art upon reviewing the description.

It is submitted with the understanding that it will not be used to interpret or limit the scope or meaning of the claims. In addition, in the foregoing detailed description, various features may be grouped together or described in a single implementation for the purpose of streamlining the disclosure. The examples described above illustrate but do not limit the disclosure. It should also be understood that numerous modifications and variations are possible in accordance with the principles of the present disclosure. As reflected in the following claims, the claimed subject matter may be directed to less than all of the features of any of the disclosed examples. Accordingly, the scope of the disclosure is defined by the following claims and their equivalents.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating a used component, comprising:

A step (202) of receiving three-dimensional measurement data (162) based on measurement results of a first used component (110) of a specific component type;

-a step (204) of performing a comparison of the three-dimensional measurement data (162) and an in-service tolerance (172) associated with the particular component type, the in-service tolerance (172) being determined based on at least a measurement of a second used component of the particular component type and an evaluation of structural characteristics of the second used component, wherein the evaluation of the second used component is performed based on a determination that the second three-dimensional measurement data exceeds a particular one of the per-design tolerances, and wherein one or more particular in-service tolerances (172) of the in-service tolerances are determined based on a simulation of a three-dimensional model of the second used component that meets a load threshold and a fatigue threshold; and

-a step (206) of generating an output (182) indicating whether the first used component (110) is suitable for reuse based on the comparison.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the evaluation comprises a result of a simulated structural analysis of a three-dimensional model of the second used component, a non-destructive testing of the second used component, or a destructive testing of the second used component.

3. The method of any of claims 1-2, wherein the structural characteristics include a load rating and a fatigue rating.

4. The method of any of claims 1-2, wherein the first used component (110) is mounted on a platform (108) when the output indicates that the first used component is suitable for reuse.

5. The method of any of claims 1-2, further comprising sending the three-dimensional measurement data (162) to a structural analysis device (104) to perform a second assessment of structural characteristics of the first used component (110) based on the three-dimensional measurement data (162) when the output (182) indicates that the first used component (110) is not suitable for reuse.

6. The method of any of claims 1-2, further comprising performing a second evaluation of a structural characteristic of the first used component (110) when the output (182) indicates that the first used component (110) is not suitable for reuse.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein performing the second evaluation comprises:

performing a second comparison of the load rating and the fatigue rating with a load threshold and a fatigue threshold; and

And outputting a result of the second comparison.

8. The method of any of claims 1-2, further comprising generating a second output indicating that the first used component (110) is suitable for reuse based on a second evaluation of structural characteristics of the first used component (110).

9. The method of claim 8, further comprising sending update data to a database (106), wherein the update data causes the database (106) to update the in-service tolerance (172) based on the second assessment, the three-dimensional measurement data (162), or both.

10. The method of any of claims 1-2, further comprising displaying a second output indicative of the first used component (110) to be repaired based on a second evaluation of structural characteristics of the first used component (110).

11. The method of any of claims 1-2, wherein the output (182) further indicates that the first used component (110) is to be repaired.

12. The method of claim 4, wherein the platform (108) comprises an aircraft, spacecraft, ship, building, bridge, oil rig, power plant, or chemical plant.

13. A system (101) for evaluating a used component, comprising:

A three-dimensional measurement device (112) configured to generate three-dimensional measurement data (162) based on measuring a first used component (110) of a particular component type; and

a computing device (114) configured to:

performing a comparison of the three-dimensional measurement data (162) and an in-service tolerance (172) associated with the particular component type, the in-service tolerance (172) being determined based on at least a measurement of a second used component of the particular component type and an evaluation of a structural characteristic of the second used component, wherein the evaluation of the second used component is performed based on determining that the second three-dimensional measurement data exceeds a particular one of the per-design tolerances, and wherein one or more particular in-service tolerances (172) of the in-service tolerances are determined based on a simulation of a three-dimensional model of the second used component that satisfies a load threshold and a fatigue threshold; and

an output (182) is generated based on the comparison indicating whether the first used component (110) is suitable for reuse.

14. The system of claim 13, further comprising a network interface (158), the network interface (158) configured to:

transmitting the three-dimensional measurement data (162), a three-dimensional model generated based on the three-dimensional measurement data (162), or both to a remote device (104); and

The in-service tolerance (172), an in-service tolerance update (174), or both are received from a database (106), wherein the three-dimensional measurement device (112) comprises a laser measurement device, an optical measurement device, or a contact-based measurement device.

15. The system of any of claims 13-14, further comprising a database (106) configured to store the in-service tolerances (172).

16. A non-transitory processor-readable medium storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to:

receiving three-dimensional measurement data based on measurement results of a first used component of a particular component type;

performing a comparison of the three-dimensional measurement data and an in-service tolerance associated with the particular component type, the in-service tolerance being determined based on at least a measurement of a second used component of the particular component type and an evaluation of a structural characteristic of the second used component, wherein the evaluation of the second used component is performed based on determining that the second three-dimensional measurement data exceeds a particular one of the per-design tolerances, and wherein one or more of the in-service tolerances (172) are determined based on a simulation of a three-dimensional model of the second used component that satisfies a load threshold and a fatigue threshold; and

17. The non-transitory processor-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the in-service tolerance comprises a length tolerance, a width tolerance, a height tolerance, an area tolerance, a volume tolerance, or a combination thereof.

18. The non-transitory processor-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the first used component has wear resulting in a variance from the component by design.